Ineos and the women

Ashworth is apparently gone already! Lord knows how or why, but it doesn't reflect well on any team at the club... Maybe his replacement cares to show up at LSV more often?
 
AmarilloMike said:
Ashworth is apparently gone already! Lord knows how or why, but it doesn't reflect well on any team at the club... Maybe his replacement cares to show up at LSV more often?
Click to expand...
Ashworth was always seen as part of the protective shield for the women's team. I'm always an optimist about United, but I suspect this means the can gets kicked even further down the road.
 
In a way it's comforting they also clearly have no idea what they're doing with the men's team. In a way.
 
It's embarrassing but not unsurprising. The vast majority of United fans (online) have no interest in the women's game or knowledge of the players. Still, you'd have expected him to do a little homework.

That said - yet another click bait article with an agenda. Where are all the articles about the Glazers or City's cheating or owners of other clubs? Talk of Ratcliffe "penny-pinching" may well be the flavour of the month, but at least he has put a considerable amount of money into the club, unlike the leeching gimps.
 
Demon Barber said:
It's embarrassing but not unsurprising. The vast majority of United fans (online) have no interest in the women's game or knowledge of the players. Still, you'd have expected him to do a little homework.

That said - yet another click bait article with an agenda. Where are all the articles about the Glazers or City's cheating or owners of other clubs? Talk of Ratcliffe "penny-pinching" may well be the flavour of the month, but at least he has put a considerable amount of money into the club, unlike the leeching gimps.
Click to expand...
Sounds a bit like the Queen doesn't it - "And what do you do?"

I'm fed up of the cup final story being trotted out again and again - there was a "What To Do About Old Trafford" planning summit in Manchester that same day. He attended that meeting (with the likes of Andy Burnham, Seb Coe etc.) after which there simply would not have been time to get to London.
 
AmarilloMike said:
Sounds a bit like the Queen doesn't it - "And what do you do?"

I'm fed up of the cup final story being trotted out again and again - there was a "What To Do About Old Trafford" planning summit in Manchester that same day. He attended that meeting (with the likes of Andy Burnham, Seb Coe etc.) after which there simply would not have been time to get to London.
Click to expand...
I guess people would care less about that cup final and accept that explanation if he didn't neglect the women team all the time. Stories like not knowing the team captain are just looking bad.
 
stefan92 said:
I guess people would care less about that cup final and accept that explanation if he didn't neglect the women team all the time. Stories like not knowing the team captain are just looking bad.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree, the optics are awful. I just wish there could be more "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". He's an old fart with attitudes from the 70s and that's ok, so's my grannie. Grannie has people around her who nudge her and say "You can't say that anymore!" (her grandchildren). Why doesn't Jim? Who's advising him? Which lackey failed to mention "By the way, brunette with the extraordinary eyelashes? That's the captain"
 
AmarilloMike said:
Oh I agree, the optics are awful. I just wish there could be more "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". He's an old fart with attitudes from the 70s and that's ok, so's my grannie. Grannie has people around her who nudge her and say "You can't say that anymore!" (her grandchildren). Why doesn't Jim? Who's advising him? Which lackey failed to mention "By the way, brunette with the extraordinary eyelashes? That's the captain"
Click to expand...
That's a good point. And there is a difference. If he used words that shouldn't be used in that context today than it could be accused by him being an old fart.

Not knowing anything, not talking about it at all looks bad and is harder to excuse.
 
stefan92 said:
That's a good point. And there is a difference. If he used words that shouldn't be used in that context today than it could be accused by him being an old fart.

Not knowing anything, not talking about it at all looks bad and is harder to excuse.
Click to expand...
He has used words he shouldn't, indicating his lack of care and knowledge. He referred to the women's team as the 'ladies team' and he referred to the men as the 'first team'. Neither phrase is deemed acceptable.

All it takes is a little nudge. Presumably Dan Ashworth was supposed to a bit of that, but who knows how his role is being replaced.
 
AmarilloMike said:
He has used words he shouldn't, indicating his lack of care and knowledge. He referred to the women's team as the 'ladies team' and he referred to the men as the 'first team'. Neither phrase is deemed acceptable.
Click to expand...
Sure. But I guess most people would be ready to excuse that if he showed genuine interest in the "ladies team". He didn't and that's the bigger issue here.
 
stefan92 said:
Sure. But I guess most people would be ready to excuse that if he showed genuine interest in the "ladies team". He didn't and that's the bigger issue here.
Click to expand...
Given his cost cutting, he'd be minded to get rid of the women's team altogether given the cost of the team and how low they ranked in importance to him
 
AmarilloMike said:
He has used words he shouldn't, indicating his lack of care and knowledge. He referred to the women's team as the 'ladies team' and he referred to the men as the 'first team'. Neither phrase is deemed acceptable.

All it takes is a little nudge. Presumably Dan Ashworth was supposed to a bit of that, but who knows how his role is being replaced.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity and wanting to keep up with an ever changing sensitive society, why would the word 'ladies' be deemed inappropriate?
 
WhatIsLove said:
Out of curiosity and wanting to keep up with an ever changing sensitive society, why would the word 'ladies' be deemed inappropriate?
Click to expand...
'Ladies' isn't on a par with 'Men'. It goes with 'Gentlemen' and conjures images of playing in dresses, being dainty so a finger nail is chipped and then living in the kitchen when you get home.

Regardless, the official, formal, name of the team is Manchester United Women. So call them that!
 
I get that he's not interested in the women's team. Financially, he's got bigger fish to fry and as far as he's concerned, the team are just a cost centre on the balance sheet. I doubt he's ever been to a women's football match. But then neither had I until United women started operation.

The bigger worry is that when you combine the cost cutting stories, the apparent Ineos micro-management and a team that the boss tells everyone he doesn't care about - it's hard to ignore the risks to the women's team.

Allegedly it was Ashworth who made sure that the women suffered the minimum damage when they lost their building while the men's team setup at Carrington was being refurbed. And we all know what happened to Ashworth.

The best thing we can hope for is that someone in the hierarchy is bothered enough to protect the budget and that the people in the women's team structure have enough authority to spend it.
 
WhatIsLove said:
Out of curiosity and wanting to keep up with an ever changing sensitive society, why would the word 'ladies' be deemed inappropriate?
Click to expand...
The 'Ladies' side was the dissolved team from the 80s and 90s, for one. The current side - like almost all female teams in the country are called Women and they play in the Women's competitions.
 
jojojo said:
I get that he's not interested in the women's team. Financially, he's got bigger fish to fry and as far as he's concerned, the team are just a cost centre on the balance sheet. I doubt he's ever been to a women's football match. But then neither had I until United women started operation.

The bigger worry is that when you combine the cost cutting stories, the apparent Ineos micro-management and a team that the boss tells everyone he doesn't care about - it's hard to ignore the risks to the women's team.

Allegedly it was Ashworth who made sure that the women suffered the minimum damage when they lost their building while the men's team setup at Carrington was being refurbed. And we all know what happened to Ashworth.

The best thing we can hope for is that someone in the hierarchy is bothered enough to protect the budget and that the people in the women's team structure have enough authority to spend it.
Click to expand...

Nah it's not good enough to be honest. He is the, effectively, the Chariman of the company. For him to not be interested in a whole section of his employees is just a bit shitty.

It also wouldn't even be that difficult for him to feign an interest in the team either. Learn a few names, show up at a few events, say the right things... it would literally take a minimal amount of effort.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Nah it's not good enough to be honest. He is the, effectively, the Chariman of the company. For him to not be interested in a whole section of his employees is just a bit shitty.

It also wouldn't even be that difficult for him to feign an interest in the team either. Learn a few names, show up at a few events, say the right things... it would literally take a minimal amount of effort.
Click to expand...
I agree that is not good enough. To schedule a "planning" meeting for a discussion about Old Trafford on the same day as the Women's FA Cup final suggests a lack of "planning."

There was a video of his tour of Carrington where even Ella Toone felt the need to tell him who she was. And around the same time he spurted that the Women's team cost United £10m per year.

But ... he is just the patsy. Chelsea have just spent £1.5m on January transfers whereas we spent nothing. Ratcliffe gets the blame and the vile Glazers get the dividends.
 
He's got every right to focus on the men's team, that's the main breadwinner and ultimately the more money that team brings in, the more money there will be for the club as a whole, ergo the woman's team.
Shouldn't be controversial to say that.

Also, for the last poster who stated that United didn't spend anything in January, they actually did, albeit only on one transfer, but after the outlay from the summer not much was really required.
 
Champ said:
He's got every right to focus on the men's team, that's the main breadwinner and ultimately the more money that team brings in, the more money there will be for the club as a whole, ergo the woman's team.
Shouldn't be controversial to say that.

Also, for the last poster who stated that United didn't spend anything in January, they actually did, albeit only on one transfer, but after the outlay from the summer not much was really required.
Click to expand...
As "the last poster," this is about the Women's team. We spent nothing.
 
Demon Barber said:
I agree that is not good enough. To schedule a "planning" meeting for a discussion about Old Trafford on the same day as the Women's FA Cup final suggests a lack of "planning."

There was a video of his tour of Carrington where even Ella Toone felt the need to tell him who she was. And around the same time he spurted that the Women's team cost United £10m per year.

But ... he is just the patsy. Chelsea have just spent £1.5m on January transfers whereas we spent nothing. Ratcliffe gets the blame and the vile Glazers get the dividends.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but it might also be true that was the only day the people he was meeting were available
 
Demon Barber said:
As "the last poster," this is about the Women's team. We spent nothing.
Click to expand...
Easy to forget as she currently seems to be back up to the back up goalie, but I don't recall seeing that Kayla Rendell was a freebie? Certainly not the squad reinforcement we were hoping for (particularly with the whole Kelly saga) but not absolutely nothing.
 
AmarilloMike said:
Easy to forget as she currently seems to be back up to the back up goalie, but I don't recall seeing that Kayla Rendell was a freebie? Certainly not the squad reinforcement we were hoping for (particularly with the whole Kelly saga) but not absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I had completely forgotten about her. I apologise.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Nah it's not good enough to be honest. He is the, effectively, the Chariman of the company. For him to not be interested in a whole section of his employees is just a bit shitty.

It also wouldn't even be that difficult for him to feign an interest in the team either. Learn a few names, show up at a few events, say the right things... it would literally take a minimal amount of effort.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The fact he doesn't even do the bare minimum shows his character.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Nah it's not good enough to be honest. He is the, effectively, the Chariman of the company. For him to not be interested in a whole section of his employees is just a bit shitty.

It also wouldn't even be that difficult for him to feign an interest in the team either. Learn a few names, show up at a few events, say the right things... it would literally take a minimal amount of effort.
Click to expand...

I'd rather he was honest than lie about being interested. Who would that serve? I'm guessing the women would know he's phoning it in.

I've no interest in the women's team or women's football In general. I'm all for everything being put into the men's team.
 
Marwood said:
I'd rather he was honest than lie about being interested. Who would that serve? I'm guessing the women would know he's phoning it in.

I've no interest in the women's team or women's football In general. I'm all for everything being put into the men's team.
Click to expand...
I would rather he learned what he bought into and paid the Women's team the respect they deserve by at least having someone beside him to talk him through things and introduce him to the star players.
 
Demon Barber said:
It's embarrassing but not unsurprising. The vast majority of United fans (online) have no interest in the women's game or knowledge of the players. Still, you'd have expected him to do a little homework.

That said - yet another click bait article with an agenda. Where are all the articles about the Glazers or City's cheating or owners of other clubs? Talk of Ratcliffe "penny-pinching" may well be the flavour of the month, but at least he has put a considerable amount of money into the club, unlike the leeching gimps.
Click to expand...

So true, your second paragraph. If all you read is sports journalism and football fan sentiment online, you’d think Ratcliffe is the antichrist and MBS is the saviour the universe needs.
 
Marwood said:
I'd rather he was honest than lie about being interested. Who would that serve? I'm guessing the women would know he's phoning it in.

I've no interest in the women's team or women's football In general. I'm all for everything being put into the men's team.
Click to expand...

You run an organisation, the bare minimum is to show an interest in the endeavours of your employees.

He doesn't have to care about women's football, but he absolute should care about his employees and what they do.
 
decorativeed said:
I would rather he learned what he bought into and paid the Women's team the respect they deserve by at least having someone beside him to talk him through things and introduce him to the star players.
Click to expand...

Annihilate Now! said:
You run an organisation, the bare minimum is to show an interest in the endeavours of your employees.

He doesn't have to care about women's football, but he absolute should care about his employees and what they do.
Click to expand...

I worked at Tesco during covid. I definitely didn't meet the boss of Tesco. Didn't even speak to the store manager. I didn't feel disrespected in any way. It's fine. Everybody has their own jobs, there's only so much time in the day.

As long as there's a support structure in place for the employees(women's team) I don't think he personally has to show up to prove his character. Especially when we know he's not all that fussed about it on a personal level. Which by the way should be OK. Whilst professionally supporting his employees he doesn't personally have to be interested in women's football. You can't force people to enjoy it.

The women's team does get support. It only exists remember by being fully subsidised.

Can feel my inner Bill Burr coming out here.
 
Marwood said:
I worked at Tesco during covid. I definitely didn't meet the boss of Tesco. Didn't even speak to the store manager. I didn't feel disrespected in any way. It's fine. Everybody has their own jobs, there's only so much time in the day.

As long as there's a support structure in place for the employees(women's team) I don't think he personally has to show up to prove his character. Especially when we know he's not all that fussed about it on a personal level. Which by the way should be OK. Whilst professionally supporting his employees he doesn't personally have to be interested in women's football. You can't force people to enjoy it.

The women's team does get support. It only exists remember by being fully subsidised.

Can feel my inner Bill Burr coming out here.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can equate a store worker at Tesco to the captain of the Manchester United Women's football team.

Either way, I bet when the boss of Tesco goes around stores, he shows a interest in the store he's visiting and the people he meets that work there.
 
Marwood said:
I worked at Tesco during covid. I definitely didn't meet the boss of Tesco. Didn't even speak to the store manager. I didn't feel disrespected in any way. It's fine. Everybody has their own jobs, there's only so much time in the day.

As long as there's a support structure in place for the employees(women's team) I don't think he personally has to show up to prove his character. Especially when we know he's not all that fussed about it on a personal level. Which by the way should be OK. Whilst professionally supporting his employees he doesn't personally have to be interested in women's football. You can't force people to enjoy it.

The women's team does get support. It only exists remember by being fully subsidised.

Can feel my inner Bill Burr coming out here.
Click to expand...
Difference is Burr is usually insightful and funny. Manchester United Women aren't Tesco checkout workers, you plum.

Also, his indifference shouldn't be okayed away. It would literally have been the difference between our best players staying after their most successful season and improving upon it, or leaving due to the obvious lack of interest in achieving that from the management.
 
Last edited:
Annihilate Now! said:
I don't think you can equate a store worker at Tesco to the captain of the Manchester United Women's football team.
Click to expand...


You definitely can't. It's one of the worst comparison's I've seen on here.

No issues if he doesn't recognise every player in the women's team but the captain or any top player should be acknowleged.

I get that the women's team doesn't generate any money however it's essential from a marketing perspective hence why they would never get rid of it
 
decorativeed said:
Difference is Burr is usually insightful and funny. Manchester United Women aren't Tesco checkout workers, you plum.

Also, his indifference shouldn't be okayed away. It would literally have been the difference between our best players staying after their most successful season and improving upon it, or leaving due to the obvious lack of interest in achieving that from the management.
Click to expand...

I always find it interesting that those who bang loudest about the rights of some are the quickest to diminish others.

Tesco checkout workers earn their company money. The company depends on them. Is this the bit where I call you a plum in return?
 
Demon Barber said:
Are you SJR? Can I claim my £10 000?
Click to expand...

It's OK to say you have no interest in a sport pal. It doesn't say anything about you as a person. Good or bad.

Obviously different for the owners of our club as womens football is a part of it. They have a responsibility to it. I just don't think it's a big deal that he doesn't visit the women's team personally or have a personal interest in it.

I don’t think it matters if he visits the men or not either. Just get on with it I say.
 
Marwood said:
I always find it interesting that those who bang loudest about the rights of some are the quickest to diminish others.

Tesco checkout workers earn their company money. The company depends on them. Is this the bit where I call you a plum in return?
Click to expand...
I'm fine with the last bit, but the rest is nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.